Talk:James Madison

Virginia was not known for "humane treatment" of slaves

I removed "As was consistent with Virginia's customs at the time" preface to sentence about Madison's treatment of his slaves: "As was consistent with Virginia's customs at the time ...the humane treatment of ... slaves." The source does not say that Virginia slaveowners uniformly treated their slaves humanely. The source (Hopkins) implies that the wealthly slaveowners were afriad of slave revolts, and did the bare minimum to keep the revolts from happening. I tried to find a wording that more accurately reflected the source, but nothing sensible came to me. I don't think the phrase "As was consistent with Virginia's customs at the time" adds anything to the sentence or paragraph, so nothing is lost by removing it.

In any case, many slaveowners treated their slaves horrifically in Virginia at that time, and suggestions to the contrary would need LOTS of sourcing and plenty of caveats.

Researchers at James Madison University documented over 100 lynchings of African Americans in Virginia after the civil war, the last one in 1932: https://sites.lib.jmu.edu/valynchings/victims/ Treatment before the war was not humane by any stretch of the imagination. Noleander (talk) 04:11, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

"100 lynchings of African Americans in Virginia" Your point being? The victims were not slaves. Dimadick (talk) 11:11, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

My point is that Virginia was a terribly racist state during Madison's era, one that joined the confederacy, and one that supported slavery, and one that - even after slavery was abolished - continued to be very, very racist. And any editor that tries to insert text that "Virginia slaveowners treated their slaves humanely" is a bigot and racist. Noleander (talk) 19:14, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

The Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution that abolished slavery was ratified in 1865. The source information given starts at 1866. This is 29 years after Madison's death. Of course, advocating human treatment of slaves is not the same as actual humane treatment. There would need to be a reliable source that says Madison did not treat his slaves humanely. This last minute Talk should have been discussed prior to FA release. Thank you. Cmguy777 (talk) 17:01, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

This article was promoted to FA nearly two years ago, in May 2023. And removing a demonstrably false statement, which is not supported by the given source, never requires advance discussion on Talk page. Noleander (talk) 19:11, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Since this article is on James Madison, did Madison or any overseers treat his slaves inhumanely? Are there any sources that say such a matter? Thank you. Cmguy777 (talk) 00:11, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

According to Elizabeth Dowling Taylor, Madison was a "garden-variety slaveholder." He followed established social norms. Madison avoided excessive cruelty to his slaves. Slaves worked from dawn to dusk, six days a week, with Sundays off. EDT, A Slave in the White House: Paul Jennings and the Madisons (2012), pages 21-22. Cmguy777 (talk) 01:01, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

65.255.82.8 (talk) 20:00, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

American Whig society

The Whig-Cliosophic society at Princeton wouldn't exist until the two organizations merged in 1928. The relevant line should read:

"Madison was a leading member of the American Whig Society, which competed on campus with a political counterpart, the Cliosophic Society."

~2026-45570-5 (talk) 15:15, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

Currently reads: "Madison was a leading member of the American Whig–Cliosophic Society, which competed on campus with a political counterpart, the Cliosophic Society ". Which cite are you using? ErnestKrause (talk) 21:45, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 August 2026

In the section "Slavery", the final part of the line ending in citation 299 should be changed from "Madison also believed slavery was incompatible with American Revolutionary principles, though he owned over one hundred African American slaves." To "Madison also believed slavery was incompatible with American Revolutionary principles, though he owned over one hundred African Americans as slaves." ~2026-45355-69 (talk) 21:40, 18 August 2026 (UTC)

Can you please explain why the change needs to be made? I'm not sure I understand.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:40, 18 August 2026 (UTC)

Madison didn't make the Virginia Plan "against democratic assambly"

Current second paragraph says the Plan was designed to "streghten republican government against democratic assamby". This implies Madison saw the Congress of the Confederation, elected by the legislatures, as a "democratic assambly" to be replaced by something else. This doesn't reflect the perspectives of the time.

During convention:

Madison refered to his plan as the "only defence agst. the inconveniencies of democracy consistent with the democratic form of Govt." (per his own notes on June 6 https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/debates_606.asp). The whole June 6 session shows how the plan was criticized by including "democratic elections" (popular participation not filtered by the state legislatures). If there was a democratic assambly being debated, it was the future lower house. Hamilton textually called Madison proposed lower house "democratic assambly" reflecting this preocupations (https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Hamilton/01-04-02-0098-0002). This is the exact opposite of what current redaction implies, the Virginia Plan introduced a democratic assambly.

The reason Madison is sometimes remembered as an anti-democrat is because from Federalist N10 onwards, in his works, he uses democracy, only to mean direct democracy. However this stronger distinction:

Appears after the Convention so it couldn't have motivated the Virginia Plan

Is used in reference to antiquity mostly, never in reference to the pre-ratification USA.

Saying that Virginia Plan was made with the purpose of creating a national government would a humbler affirmation which doesn't create confused views on the political debates on the time. Minos Cesar (talk) 20:26, 29 September 2026 (UTC)